BBC 2: The conspiracy files – My responce

For years I tried to avoid writing, talking or even giving my opinions of 9/11. Of who was right and who was wrong. My view is “I hold no views”. Neither the view of the official story of 9/11 and what happened that day. Nor the “conspiracy” theorist views. But after watching last nights’ BBC programme ‘The conspiracy files’, I just had to get a piece of the pie, as the very age-old English saying goes.
My word! Where can I begin with this one… From the moment i watched the BBC programme about the 9/11 conspiracy theories, I just had to do a review of the poor attempt at which BBC have made. In trying to debunk the 9/11 conspiracy theories and theorists. Which has led me to getting involved in the 9/11 discussions after all, unfortunately.

Firstly, I find it amusing how such a programme was broadcast to millions of people on the eve of the infamous day, which happened a decade ago now. What were they trying to achieve by broadcasting the programme at such a time? I guess they probably were trying to win more support for the cause of “the war on terror”. Since, by now the overwhelming majority of the civilised, sane and intelligent humans all over the world know the official 9/11 story has many gaping holes which have not been, and are not being filled in. Take for example the issue of the world trade center 7 (WTC 7) going down on its own footprint!
To this day (although they touched upon it), the theory surrounding it has not been satisfyingly answered. – The smoking gun of 9/11 still goes unanswered.
The conspiracy theorists claim that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition. There are a number of reasons why they say this. One of the reason is that WTC 7 came down on its own footprint. Something which can ONLY happen in a controlled demolition.

Secondly, there were remnants of red chips “present” at the scene of the crime. Which formed as a result of the high explosives used to bring down WTC 7.
BBC tried in vain to answer this “myth” as they call it. However, out of the only TWO scientists they hired to debunk the theory, said the red chips which were “present” at the scene are nothing but paint remnants! – what a poor attempt.
There are over 150+ architects and engineers from all over the world who have proven that the building WTC 7 could not have, and definitely would not have, been brought down by mere office fires. No where in the world this has ever happened to a skyscraper! Simply because, high raised buildings are built to withstand natural disasters like flooding, fires, hurricanes etc.
Furthermore, one out of the two scientist then goes on to say the reason why No one could falsify the conspiracy theorist claims (amongst whom are also the most advance experts in their fields. With years of experience behind them) was because everyone (government scientists) had other “interesting” things to do. – Rather than answer these serious and pressing questions! – On the issues surrounding the collapse of WTC 7.
The official story is because of the office fires burning for several hours. One of the internal columns gave way and as a result the building collapsed. – this is argument is clearly not based on no solid foundations. The theorists claim If the building WAS to collapse then all the columns supporting the building MUST have given way simultaneously for the building to fall in a free fall time.

Nevertheless, a person who is genuinely seeking answers to the event surrounding 9/11 can do a simple search and find many expert opinions on how false and deceiving the official story is.
Having tried miserably to debunk the WTC 7 issue, the programme then moves on to dispel the other common theories of the events of that day. Again I have to applaud BBC of trying to play the “good guy” here. Of trying to show an impartial view of 9/11 hysteria. It amazes me how despite 10 years having gone by they are still trying to win the opinions of people. It just shows that there are still people out there that do not always believe everything they are fed by the box in the room, namely the television.

To sum up, if the BBC tried to stamp out the flame of inquisitiveness of the general public in relation to the official story of 9/11. I’m afraid they have failed miserably. As this programme does more favour for the conspiracy theorists than the other party, that being the “official story party”.

One thought on “BBC 2: The conspiracy files – My responce”

I’ve been looking for the name of the piece and the composer since hearing it at a 9/11 memorial over 5 years ago – I’m pretty sure it’s quite famous.

I’ve e-mailed the BBC to ask, and they’ve said it’ll cost too much money to find out!

The programme was aired on Sunday evening, and the piece of music in question was featured in the background as people were talking, probably about 5 minutes before the credits came on!
I’ll be eternally grateful to anyone who can help me 🙂